Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Brought to You by . . .

After a year of controversy, public television stations gave the film ''Days of Rage: The Young Palestinians'' an airing on Wednesday evening. The main, early argument had been whether the 90-minute pro-Palestinian documentary was too blatantly biased for treatment as broadcast journalism. The Public Broadcasting Service tried to meet those objections by wrapping the film in an additional hour of disclaimer and panel discussion.

That made for a long evening but furnished a rough solution to an intractable problem. Viewers were surely able to judge the film's worth, with or without the commentary. Far less satisfying was the network's handling of a more fundamental question: Whose film was it?

Available evidence now suggests that the Arab American Cultural Foundation, which draws support from Kuwaiti and other Arab interests, has accurately claimed sponsorship of the film. The foundation, which was involved with the production from its inception, has purchased copies and the remaining rights to the film from Jo Franklin-Trout, who produced it and is a board member of the foundation. Ms. Franklin-Trout says she advanced her own money for the production. But if the foundation agreed at the outset to make these purchases, then it is no less a sponsor.

PBS has rules to protect against broadcasting programs that are ostensibly journalism but are actually propaganda for interested parties. But the network was unable at air time to tell viewers whether those safeguards had been breached. Commenting on charges of hidden sponsorship, an announcer said somewhat enigmatically, ''PBS has investigated these allegations and at this time has found no basis for canceling this broadcast.''

That's not good enough for the integrity of public television. Given the tortured history of this production, PBS was justified and perhaps compelled to proceed with the broadcast. But it's far from clear that PBS asked the right questions, or received the right answers, about sponsorship. It's possible that a sharper initial inquiry could have avoided the entire controversy. A fuller accounting is in order, including an explanation of the network's routine practices for maintaining public confidence in its journalism.

We are continually improving the quality of our text archives. Please send feedback, error reports,
and suggestions to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

A version of this editorial appears in print on September 8, 1989, on Page A00024 of the National edition with the headline: Brought to You by . . . Today's Paper|Subscribe